And do you plan on adding the tcg decks like "Blackout", "Overgrowth", "Zap!" and "Brushfire"?

I've already added the Blackout, etc. decks that came alongside the first 3 sets (9 decks in total). As for the decks in the GBC game, some of them use cards that aren't included in this project, so they'd need to at least be altered accordingly by someone who knows more about deck-building than I. They're all listed on Bulbapedia.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the__end

EDIT
A suggestion how to manage the AI:
Why not add some check for strategies to the prefabricated decks in the PBS file?
For example you could make a check if the deck is an "Evolution deck" or if you mainly use Basic cards.
And because the AI can only use prefabricated decks you have to make different AI for "Evolution decks" and "Basic Card decks".
For example "Evolution decks" should concentrate to evolving their pokemon as fast as possible and using them and "Basic Card" decks (with cards like Electabuzz) should try to overwhelm the opponent at the beginning of the game.
This way you can even combine different checks.
As an example lets use the both strategies above. If you have selected "Evolution deck" and "Basic Card deck" the AI should try to overwhelm the opponent with strong Basic cards at the beginning and try to evolve their other Basic cards as fast as possible. After the weak Basic Cards are evolved the AI should stop using strong Basic cards and start using evolved pokemon cards.
You see that if you combine strategies you need a priority for each one. In the above example the "Basic Card deck" strategy should have a little bit higher priority then the "Evolution Deck" strategy. This way the AI should use the "Basic Card deck" as its main strategy but it doesn't ignore the "Evolution deck" strategy.
Of course you need conditions for each strategy when to get higher or lower priority. For example the "Basic Card deck" should have a condition that this strategy gets lower priority when you have evolved cards. And because the "Basic Card deck" strategy has now lower priority then the "Evolution deck" strategy the AI starts to use evolved pokemon.
And you need to determine which cards can be called "strong" Basic cards so the "Basic Card deck" AI knows with which cards it should try to overwhelm the opponent.

Hope the stuff i said makes sense. I am not a programmer so i don't know how programming actually works. So sorry if i talked nonsense.

I really don't think such strategies need to be separated. It all boils down to "use the best cards", and what constitutes a "best card" depends on the environment (i.e. what other cards are in play, etc.). This can certainly become convoluted very quickly as the AI develops, as there'll be all sorts of checks and evaluations. This is especially true when you start thinking of combos.

Of course, the AI is going to cheat. That is, it'll make its choices while knowing about cards it shouldn't be able to know about (e.g. cards in the player's hand, which prize card is best to take, whether it'll draw something good because of Professor Oak). However, it won't influence the outcomes of coin flips or whatever, so it'll be fair that way. I think making the AI omniscient is the only way it can be made to stand a chance against players.

As for how the AI will actually work, I have a vague idea. At the start of its turn, it looks around the duel and lists everything it is able to do (play a card from the hand, use an in-play effect such as a Pokémon Power, retreat, etc.), and then assign a desirability value to it. Calculating this value for each action depends a lot on the environment, and is the convoluted part. Once all the values are calculated, it will do the most desirable action and repeat (recalculating the values for what's left). Once there's nothing left to do, it will attack if possible and desirable - the good thing is that an attack is always the last thing in a turn (and there's always just 1 attack per turn), which makes it a bit simpler.

It sounds simple when I write it in just one paragraph, and some actions will always be desirable (e.g. play Bill) and some will never be worth using (e.g. Mankey's Pokémon Power, as the AI will know all those cards via cheating anyway). However, when is the best time to play Energy Removal, and which Pokémon/energy should be hit by it? How about Super Energy Removal, which involves a cost to the user and may not be worth it (and if so, which card should the AI pay)? There's a huge amount of thought that needs to go into the AI for even a single effect, and I think that such thought needs to be done in order to make the AI worthwhile.

Tuning can come much later, e.g. deciding the threshold desirability value below which an action shouldn't be done, and how much randomness to involve in the choices.

As you can see, any emergent "strategy" will depend entirely on the make-up of the deck. It can only depend on the cards you've got available ("work with what you've got"), and it's up to the AI calculations for each card to decide how useful (and therefore desirable) it is. The overall behaviour of the AI will simply look like what it does the most, which depends on what it's got (e.g. an energy-controlling strategy will appear if there are a lot of energy-controlling effects in the deck). I don't think there's any need to include deck-specific AI profiles (particularly as it would tend to rail-road and hurt decks which could sometimes benefit from profiles they don't have), and instead throw every situational calculation into the one AI used for everything.

I've already added the Blackout, etc. decks that came alongside the first 3 sets (9 decks in total). As for the decks in the GBC game, some of them use cards that aren't included in this project, so they'd need to at least be altered accordingly by someone who knows more about deck-building than I. They're all listed on Bulbapedia.

Yeah the list is on Bulbapedia but you shouldn't mix up the Auto Deck Machine decks with the decks not available in the Auto Deck Machine! The Auto Deck Machine decks are meant for players and the other decks for the AI. There are cards that make the AI harder to beat and cards that need a strategy which the AI cant come up with.

Can you tell me some cards that aren't included but are needed for a deck? Maybe i can come up with a replacement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maruno

Of course, the AI is going to cheat. That is, it'll make its choices while knowing about cards it shouldn't be able to know about (e.g. cards in the player's hand, which prize card is best to take, whether it'll draw something good because of Professor Oak). However, it won't influence the outcomes of coin flips or whatever, so it'll be fair that way. I think making the AI omniscient is the only way it can be made to stand a chance against players.

You should be careful so that the "cheat" is not to obvious. :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maruno

As for how the AI will actually work, I have a vague idea. At the start of its turn, it looks around the duel and lists everything it is able to do (play a card from the hand, use an in-play effect such as a Pokémon Power, retreat, etc.), and then assign a desirability value to it. Calculating this value for each action depends a lot on the environment, and is the convoluted part. Once all the values are calculated, it will do the most desirable action and repeat (recalculating the values for what's left). Once there's nothing left to do, it will attack if possible and desirable - the good thing is that an attack is always the last thing in a turn (and there's always just 1 attack per turn), which makes it a bit simpler.

So the AI will do anything that it is able to do before attacking? Isn't it sometimes better (smarter) if the AI skips some actions if it doesn't need to do it? For example saving an Energy card for next turn is sometimes better then putting it on a Benched Pokemon that doesn't need any more energy. Or saving Professor Oak until you have less cards in your hand.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maruno

It sounds simple when I write it in just one paragraph, and some actions will always be desirable (e.g. play Bill) and some will never be worth using (e.g. Mankey's Pokémon Power, as the AI will know all those cards via cheating anyway). However, when is the best time to play Energy Removal, and which Pokémon/energy should be hit by it? How about Super Energy Removal, which involves a cost to the user and may not be worth it (and if so, which card should the AI pay)? There's a huge amount of thought that needs to go into the AI for even a single effect, and I think that such thought needs to be done in order to make the AI worthwhile.

Energy Removal should hit the active Pokemon if it has enough energy to attack or if it will get enough energy to attack next turn. If the active pokemon will not get enough energy to attack next turn the AI chooses the pokemon with the most energy on the Bench. This is the simple way you could do it. If you want it smarter you should make it check the attack power of the benched pokemon and if they have enough energy to do this attack. If there is a benched pokemon that has a much stronger attack then the opponents active pokemon and enough energy to do this attack and if your opponents active pokemon have/will get enough energy to retreat next turn choose the benched pokemon. Which energy to choose is easier then choosing the pokemon i guess. "Color" energy should always get priority over "colorless" energy. "Color" energy that has the same type as the card should always get priority over other "color" energy.

Super energy removal should first check if you have more energy then you need in game. There is an order you can check this. First control the active pokemon. If AIs active pokemon doesn't has enough Energy to attack there is no need for other checks because you don't have enough energy.
If the active pokemon has enough energy check your bench for the amount of pokemon with energy cards. If its zero super energy removal would target AIs active pokemon and it is not worth it. If you have pokemon with energy on your bench check if you have at least one energy on your hand. If you dont you should check if your active pokemon has enough hp to survive next turn. if it has or you have an energy card on your hand there is no problem using super energy removal and choosing the weakest pokemon on the AIs bench. Colorless energy is preferred to pay of course.

You are right that the thoughts need to be done! But not by you alone you know. :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maruno

As you can see, any emergent "strategy" will depend entirely on the make-up of the deck. It can only depend on the cards you've got available ("work with what you've got"), and it's up to the AI calculations for each card to decide how useful (and therefore desirable) it is. The overall behaviour of the AI will simply look like what it does the most, which depends on what it's got (e.g. an energy-controlling strategy will appear if there are a lot of energy-controlling effects in the deck). I don't think there's any need to include deck-specific AI profiles (particularly as it would tend to rail-road and hurt decks which could sometimes benefit from profiles they don't have), and instead throw every situational calculation into the one AI used for everything.

Yeah an AI that can handle any situation is much better but much more complicated as well. I thought a deck-specific AI is more intelligent and easier to do and that is why i suggested it. After all the AI can't use any other deck then the specific decks you give it. And any prefabricated deck you can give the AI has most likely a strategy that would benefit that deck. Instead of hoping the AI comes up with the strategy itself you can guide it a little right?

Yeah the list is on Bulbapedia but you shouldn't mix up the Auto Deck Machine decks with the decks not available in the Auto Deck Machine! The Auto Deck Machine decks are meant for players and the other decks for the AI. There are cards that make the AI harder to beat and cards that need a strategy which the AI cant come up with.

There is no Auto Deck Machine, so that's not a problem (and in any case, the available decks would be defined by the Machine itself). Every single premade deck, no matter how it's used or where/if it's available to the player, is defined in the same way.

I linked to that Bulbapedia page because at the bottom there's a list of every single deck in the game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the__end

So the AI will do anything that it is able to do before attacking? Isn't it sometimes better (smarter) if the AI skips some actions if it doesn't need to do it? For example saving an Energy card for next turn is sometimes better then putting it on a Benched Pokemon that doesn't need any more energy. Or saving Professor Oak until you have less cards in your hand.

That's all part of making the AI. It's all calculations about whether it should play a particular card. Whether it is able to play that card is only the first (easy) step.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the__end

Energy Removal should hit the active Pokemon if it has enough energy to attack or if it will get enough energy to attack next turn. If the active pokemon will not get enough energy to attack next turn the AI chooses the pokemon with the most energy on the Bench. This is the simple way you could do it. If you want it smarter you should make it check the attack power of the benched pokemon and if they have enough energy to do this attack. If there is a benched pokemon that has a much stronger attack then the opponents active pokemon and enough energy to do this attack and if your opponents active pokemon have/will get enough energy to retreat next turn choose the benched pokemon. Which energy to choose is easier then choosing the pokemon i guess. "Color" energy should always get priority over "colorless" energy. "Color" energy that has the same type as the card should always get priority over other "color" energy.

Super energy removal should first check if you have more energy then you need in game. There is an order you can check this. First control the active pokemon. If AIs active pokemon doesn't has enough Energy to attack there is no need for other checks because you don't have enough energy.
If the active pokemon has enough energy check your bench for the amount of pokemon with energy cards. If its zero super energy removal would target AIs active pokemon and it is not worth it. If you have pokemon with energy on your bench check if you have at least one energy on your hand. If you dont you should check if your active pokemon has enough hp to survive next turn. if it has or you have an energy card on your hand there is no problem using super energy removal and choosing the weakest pokemon on the AIs bench. Colorless energy is preferred to pay of course.

I only mentioned those cards to give an example of how there's a lot of calculations involved in deciding whether to use them; I wasn't actually looking for help with them right now. However, your large paragraphs show that there are a lot of things to consider.

I disagree with your last sentence, though. The only Colorless energy is Double Colorless, which can be very useful (for any Colorless Pokémon, or Charizard, etc.). I'd say figuring out if there's an excess card anywhere is a good place to start (the level of emergency can allow alternatives, of course).

Quote:

Originally Posted by the__end

Yeah an AI that can handle any situation is much better but much more complicated as well. I thought a deck-specific AI is more intelligent and easier to do and that is why i suggested it. After all the AI can't use any other deck then the specific decks you give it. And any prefabricated deck you can give the AI has most likely a strategy that would benefit that deck. Instead of hoping the AI comes up with the strategy itself you can guide it a little right?

Possibly, but you'd need to do it over and over for each AI profile (not the entire thing, of course, but significant amounts). I imagine strategy is the hardest thing to make an AI do, and that it's probably actually easier to let it deal with each card on its own merit rather than teach it how to follow a strategy. There's the added bonus of being able to adapt to changes in the game, such as shifting to an aggressive style when you can afford it (e.g. when you could win by being aggressive rather than following a stall-type AI profile).

The one big thing needed for creating a half-decent AI is testing. That means the game itself needs to work first, so I can throw out a release and let you all report on how the AI worked (noting any particular cleverness or stupidity), which then lets the AI be modified and improved. This is one of the reasons I'd like to concentrate only on one AI rather than a variety. It's also easier to troubleshoot.

II disagree with your last sentence, though. The only Colorless energy is Double Colorless, which can be very useful (for any Colorless Pokémon, or Charizard, etc.). I'd say figuring out if there's an excess card anywhere is a good place to start (the level of emergency can allow alternatives, of course).

Colorless Energy is useless for Charizard. Any Colorless energy card can only be used to pay for Colorless energy requirements on a Pokemon. For example, if a Charizard required a Fire energy for one of its attacks, you cannot use a Colorless energy card for it.
However, any energy card can be used to pay for any Colorless energy requirements.
That is why it is much easier to pay for Colorless energy requirements and that makes the Colorless energy worthless/dispensable. Double Colorless is a useful card because it provides two energy at once and that is good for some cards with more then one colorless attack requirements.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maruno

Possibly, but you'd need to do it over and over for each AI profile (not the entire thing, of course, but significant amounts). I imagine strategy is the hardest thing to make an AI do, and that it's probably actually easier to let it deal with each card on its own merit rather than teach it how to follow a strategy. There's the added bonus of being able to adapt to changes in the game, such as shifting to an aggressive style when you can afford it (e.g. when you could win by being aggressive rather than following a stall-type AI profile).

You are right about it taking more effort and time to create AI profiles. But IMO its worth it. I know a guy who is improving the AI from the good old "Age of Empires 2" because the included AI was dumb. You could beat the computer opponent in minutes in "extreme" mode. But after i updated with his patch i cant even beat in "middle". You know what he did? He made an independent AI for each Civilization! This way he maximized the use of their advantages in battle and minimized their wasteful behavior in terms of resources. If you are a AoE2 player i can link you to his site if you want.
The point is that in some games it is smarter to make an specific AI which can handle a situation perfectly instead of making an general AI that can handle any situation average. I don't know if the TCG is one of these games but i think so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maruno

The one big thing needed for creating a half-decent AI is testing. That means the game itself needs to work first, so I can throw out a release and let you all report on how the AI worked (noting any particular cleverness or stupidity), which then lets the AI be modified and improved. This is one of the reasons I'd like to concentrate only on one AI rather than a variety. It's also easier to troubleshoot.

This is a good point! I can imagine that troubleshooting would be more time consuming if you have more then one AI which uses the same broken part. On the other hand you would know where to fix the other AI before you even look at it.
But like i said i don't know much about programming myself. I just see interesting stuff people do and i try to apply it theoretically on other things.

Quote:

Originally Posted by p.claydon

well the template i posted in the tcg section on here has decent deck icons and energy icons (different sizes)

Colorless Energy is useless for Charizard. Any Colorless energy card can only be used to pay for Colorless energy requirements on a Pokemon. For example, if a Charizard required a Fire energy for one of its attacks, you cannot use a Colorless energy card for it.
However, any energy card can be used to pay for any Colorless energy requirements.
That is why it is much easier to pay for Colorless energy requirements and that makes the Colorless energy worthless/dispensable. Double Colorless is a useful card because it provides two energy at once and that is good for some cards with more then one colorless attack requirements.

I see you're forgetting Charizard's Pokémon Power. I know how energy works, and I still say that Double Colorless Energy is great in the right deck.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the__end

You are right about it taking more effort and time to create AI profiles. But IMO its worth it. I know a guy who is improving the AI from the good old "Age of Empires 2" because the included AI was dumb. You could beat the computer opponent in minutes in "extreme" mode. But after i updated with his patch i cant even beat in "middle". You know what he did? He made an independent AI for each Civilization! This way he maximized the use of their advantages in battle and minimized their wasteful behavior in terms of resources. If you are a AoE2 player i can link you to his site if you want.
The point is that in some games it is smarter to make an specific AI which can handle a situation perfectly instead of making an general AI that can handle any situation average. I don't know if the TCG is one of these games but i think so.

This is a good point! I can imagine that troubleshooting would be more time consuming if you have more then one AI which uses the same broken part. On the other hand you would know where to fix the other AI before you even look at it.
But like i said i don't know much about programming myself. I just see interesting stuff people do and i try to apply it theoretically on other things.

AoE is a bit different because a given civilisation's units are always the same, and the progression between ages and tech trees and all that are fixed. TCG decks can contain many different cards, and cards are drawn randomly in a duel. I think it's far too much hassle to make multiple AIs, given this randomness which would need to be accounted for.

As I've said, all you can really do is work with what you're given, and what you're given is some random cards from your deck. Now, you can go into any amount of detail you like when it comes to making the AI for a particular card (e.g. defining circumstances in which it will prefer one target over another), but it would get very convoluted if you get too invested in it. Even so, taking each card as it comes is a modular system, and easier to manage and tinker with.

One thing I'd like to hear from someone who knows about AI is: is my idea any good? Is there an alternative system to calculating desirability for each action that would be more suitable for this kind of game?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maruno

As for how the AI will actually work, I have a vague idea. At the start of its turn, it looks around the duel and lists everything it is able to do (play a card from the hand, use an in-play effect such as a Pokémon Power, retreat, etc.), and then assign a desirability value to it. Calculating this value for each action depends a lot on the environment, and is the convoluted part. Once all the values are calculated, it will do the most desirable action and repeat (recalculating the values for what's left). Once there's nothing left to do, it will attack if possible and desirable - the good thing is that an attack is always the last thing in a turn (and there's always just 1 attack per turn), which makes it a bit simpler.

I see you're forgetting Charizard's Pokémon Power. I know how energy works, and I still say that Double Colorless Energy is great in the right deck.

I cant believe i forgot its ability. xD Maybe because I always preferred (and played) Blastoise over Charizard.

And i didn't said Double Energy is a bad card. I said that it is better to remove a Colorless Energy from your Pokemon with "Super Energy Removal" then removing a Basic Energy because every Basic Energy can be paid for a Colorless energy requirement.

And you once mentioned that you will make boosters for energy cards right?
Maybe instead of this you should give an infinite number of each Basic Energy to the player. Basic Energies are always needed in mass and its bothersome to open boosters (even if they are for free) to get them.

And you once mentioned that you will make boosters for energy cards right?
Maybe instead of this you should give an infinite number of each Basic Energy to the player. Basic Energies are always needed in mass and its bothersome to open boosters (even if they are for free) to get them.

I said it will be possible, eventually. I may include an energy-only booster set as an example of how to create mix-'n'-match booster sets, but it certainly doesn't need to be a feature. Mix-'n'-match booster sets will cause problems with throttling rarities, though, so I may ditch throttling and have booster pack contents be entirely random.

If you want to give the player 60 of each energy card, you can do that yourself. It makes finding energy cards in booster packs pointless and annoying, though. Besides, I think the need for energy cards encourages the player to duel more in order to get more booster packs.

The point is that in some games it is smarter to make an specific AI which can handle a situation perfectly instead of making an general AI that can handle any situation average. I don't know if the TCG is one of these games but i think so.

That depends on the AI. If it's really good, it will develop a strategy according to the cards in the deck. I.E. In YGO there are effects that make you discarding cards as a effect, not as a cost. For most cards that doesn't changes a thing and you would want to avoid it, but in certain decks it is the main strategy to discards cards because of effects (because that will activate their effects respectively) or to have an empty hand.
On the other side, we may want to have different difficulties for AIs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the__end

And you once mentioned that you will make boosters for energy cards right?
Maybe instead of this you should give an infinite number of each Basic Energy to the player. Basic Energies are always needed in mass and its bothersome to open boosters (even if they are for free) to get them.

I just came across this thread today when I was thinking of making a Pokemon TCG, I thought 'Why bother if someones already making one right?' So how far have you actually got with this whole project, in terms of programming and such?

I just came across this thread today when I was thinking of making a Pokemon TCG, I thought 'Why bother if someones already making one right?' So how far have you actually got with this whole project, in terms of programming and such?

That was my thought when I made this thread. Turns out I started making my own anyway.

I've already put an alpha out which includes a library/deck builder and half of a duel, plus many background scripts which support it all (like the compilers). There's a link in here somewhere, and I'll get round to editing the first post to include the latest information.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ooka

Sorry, I'm replying without reading the thread yet, I'll get to that later this evening probably.

I'd like to contribute (inb4 fullmetal stabs me xDD). Is the interface going to be an exact clone of the old games, or are you trying to reinvent it to a nicer, newer interface?

I could help with that (I'm a graphic designer by trade), or with coding.

That's very nice to hear. Your skills will be very welcome, as soon as I come up with an actual list of what needs doing.

As far as the visual style goes, I'm replicating the Asobikata game, albeit with a few tweaks to suit a single screen and keyboard controls. That game doesn't have any visuals for anything other than duels, though, so I'm making up other screens (e.g. Library, Card Dex) as I go along - they could certainly use improvements, if you want to have a go at them.

Your mock-ups look a little rough. I have to say it's very difficult to tell which card in the list is being selected, and there's no space for a "Deck" tab.

The design itself doesn't support a half-size screen, which I'd prefer it to do if possible. The fact that you're using a different (smaller) font doesn't help show whether the design would actually work properly in-game.

On the other hand, I like the idea of fading out the non-current tabs, and of having some kind of border around the list itself to mark it off. The black background is also nice, better than the current grey, and the simple tab design is also nice.

However, as I've alluded to, space is an issue. "Imposter Professor Oak" is the longest card name, so that needs to be able to fit in the list area using the appropriate font. I'd prefer to show more cards at once rather than less, and currently it shows nine while yours shows eight. This means that border around the list probably won't fit after all.

The various card symbols were taken directly from the old TCG game, or knocked together by me. They could definitely be improved. You've just fancied up one of those old symbols, and while it does look nice, I'm wondering whether different designs might work as well.

That depends on the AI. If it's really good, it will develop a strategy according to the cards in the deck. I.E. In YGO there are effects that make you discarding cards as a effect, not as a cost. For most cards that doesn't changes a thing and you would want to avoid it, but in certain decks it is the main strategy to discards cards because of effects (because that will activate their effects respectively) or to have an empty hand.
On the other side, we may want to have different difficulties for AIs.

An entire team is working on the Yugioh games but the AI is still dumb and slow. Of course they need to make a general AI because there are just to many cards with to many different effects that need to be considered. Because of some effects it needs to do tons of calculation which makes it so slow. It even calculates all the cards the opponent has which is pretty ridiculous because it can't know what you are planning and it will make the wrong decision anyway.
Do you think that much effort is needed for a (non-profit) Starter Kit that just one person is coding? IMO not.
I think, because of how the Pokemon TCG is build and that the AI is forced to use the deck you give it, you can achieve much more with an AI that is concentrated on the deck it is using. An AI that "knows", that it needs Blastoises Ability as often as possible to support his water deck, is much smarter then an AI that "knows" how to use its ability but doesn't do it correctly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ooka

Had a read through some of the thread. I made a little mockup, let me know what you think.

The design itself doesn't support a half-size screen, which I'd prefer it to do if possible.

The cards will lose important details by displaying a lower resolution. And its harder to make good looking concepts. I don't understand why you want a kit that supports half sized screens. It makes stuff more complicated then they need to be. But if you still insist on it i can cut out the images out of the cards so you can only display them with written information. This way we can save quality and you can have a half sized game.

Your mock-ups look a little rough. I have to say it's very difficult to tell which card in the list is being selected, and there's no space for a "Deck" tab.

Well considering there's a huge picture of it on the right I don't see how xDD I can make the selected item on the left stand out more probably. As for Deck tab space completely slipped my mind. I'll look into that.

Quote:

The design itself doesn't support a half-size screen, which I'd prefer it to do if possible. The fact that you're using a different (smaller) font doesn't help show whether the design would actually work properly in-game.

The idea was that the card list would expand/contract as the screen size increased/decreased. And the font is just one of the ones included with Essentials, so it should work fine in-game.

Quote:

On the other hand, I like the idea of fading out the non-current tabs, and of having some kind of border around the list itself to mark it off. The black background is also nice, better than the current grey, and the simple tab design is also nice.

However, as I've alluded to, space is an issue. "Imposter Professor Oak" is the longest card name, so that needs to be able to fit in the list area using the appropriate font. I'd prefer to show more cards at once rather than less, and currently it shows nine while yours shows eight. This means that border around the list probably won't fit after all.

Again the font used is included with Essentials (Power Red and Green) so there shouldn't be a problem using it.

As far as one card difference, is it really that huge a deal? I mean, at least personally, when items are really skinny on a list clicking them can tend to be aggravating. I end up clicking the wrong one and having to undo whatever it is I just did. Anyways, that's really up to you, I just figured a "sort by" option would be nice, and didn't mind slightly bigger options.

Quote:

The various card symbols were taken directly from the old TCG game, or knocked together by me. They could definitely be improved. You've just fancied up one of those old symbols, and while it does look nice, I'm wondering whether different designs might work as well.

Sure, you're meaning completely custom symbols that don't look like the originals at all? I thought about that but didn't know how well it would be received. I'm all for it though.

An entire team is working on the Yugioh games but the AI is still dumb and slow.

What? Last time I checked – I think it was World Tournament 2011 – the AI knew a lot of different difficulties and when it needed time, especially when it was in a though situation, it felt more like battling a human who have to think about his decisions rather then immediately coming with an reaction to the situation.

However, we will solve this issue one way or another. The difficulty with deck-depending AIs is if the programmer can even see all possibilities and combinations I guess.

An entire team is working on the Yugioh games but the AI is still dumb and slow. Of course they need to make a general AI because there are just to many cards with to many different effects that need to be considered. Because of some effects it needs to do tons of calculation which makes it so slow. It even calculates all the cards the opponent has which is pretty ridiculous because it can't know what you are planning and it will make the wrong decision anyway.
Do you think that much effort is needed for a (non-profit) Starter Kit that just one person is coding? IMO not.
I think, because of how the Pokemon TCG is build and that the AI is forced to use the deck you give it, you can achieve much more with an AI that is concentrated on the deck it is using. An AI that "knows", that it needs Blastoises Ability as often as possible to support his water deck, is much smarter then an AI that "knows" how to use its ability but doesn't do it correctly.

This isn't a single game though, wherein the functionality doesn't have to extend beyond what I personally want the game to do. Anyone can create any deck and give it to an NPC, which under your idea means that they would also need to make a new AI to support that deck (or use an existing "close enough" AI).

Let's consider what a profile AI would do anyway. It looks at a card and decides whether it should be used. This means analysing the field and deciding how best to use it. This is no different than what an all-encompassing AI would do, with the one exception being that for your way, there would be a few more calculations which check the kind of AI and alter various calculations accordingly.

I honestly think making a single AI would be easier than making several.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the__end

The cards will lose important details by displaying a lower resolution. And its harder to make good looking concepts. I don't understand why you want a kit that supports half sized screens. It makes stuff more complicated then they need to be. But if you still insist on it i can cut out the images out of the cards so you can only display them with written information. This way we can save quality and you can have a half sized game.

Because Essentials lets the player reduce the screen size. It's an utterly stupid thing to do, but it's possible, and I'd like to keep the design intact if someone does it. I really don't think it's any more complicated to design for a 256x192 screen anyway - I've never had any problems with doing so.

The card images don't need messing with. Perhaps I'll show them like the duel background (half at once, and you can move it up and down).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ooka

The idea was that the card list would expand/contract as the screen size increased/decreased. And the font is just one of the ones included with Essentials, so it should work fine in-game.

None of the regular fonts that Essentials uses are that small. I don't want to use the smaller versions of those fonts because they're harder to read.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ooka

As far as one card difference, is it really that huge a deal? I mean, at least personally, when items are really skinny on a list clicking them can tend to be aggravating. I end up clicking the wrong one and having to undo whatever it is I just did. Anyways, that's really up to you, I just figured a "sort by" option would be nice.

If anything, the items in your list are a little "skinnier" than how they already are. There's no clicking anyway - no mouse support. Having more items visible at once makes it easier to find what you're looking for. There are some sorting and filter options too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ooka

Sure, you're meaning completely custom symbols that don't look like the originals at all? I thought about that but didn't know how well it would be received. I'm all for it though.

Well, whatever works best. It's an opportunity to create something, see what works.

None of the regular fonts that Essentials uses are that small. I don't want to use the smaller versions of those fonts because they're harder to read.

Alright, I don't really know what to do with "Red's Cards" or "Alt: Options" yet, but I increased the font size used for the card listings.

Quote:

If anything, the items in your list are a little "skinnier" than how they already are. There's no clicking anyway - no mouse support. Having more items visible at once makes it easier to find what you're looking for. There are some sorting and filter options too.

Oh, sorry about that must have missed it. I removed the options around the card listing. It gave enough room for one more card name.

Quote:

Well, whatever works best. It's an opportunity to create something, see what works.

The difficulty with deck-depending AIs is if the programmer can even see all possibilities and combinations I guess.

Hmm you might be right about that. But that is a way how we as a community can help.
And the Yugioh AI is dumber then you maybe think. It looks smarter then it is because of the decks the creators gave it. And that is how they give it different difficulties.

Sure thing, I'm not really a TCG player but I loved the one for Gameboy (So I don't know too much about what's needed/isn't). I'll look around for a resource or something to go off of and give it another shot.

Of course, I could always use newer/better deck icons as well. The ones I've got are entirely placeholders.

Hmm, since the TCG extension will be used all by itself (i.e. not alongside any existing pixelly Essentials screens), I think it might as well use graphics designed for a 512x384 screen (i.e. not pixelly). Yes, I've changed my mind. It does mean that all the graphics I've got already would need up-rezzing, though.

All this decision will affect is the fine detail - the actual layouts and things will be the same anyway.

The PokéCommunity

Meta

Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.